Classic WoW Wiki talk:Featured article/Articles
New nominations go at the bottom of the second section. Current nominations Classes & Races I think we should have classes in there, just a a bit of help, and races for a bit of lore. I am not very good at making suggestions, but there is my idea. :I've looked at your suggestion and have viewed every class and race page separately. Here's my report: :The druid article is good :The hunter article is badly lined out :The mage article is short, and the section weren't done good enough :Paladin, I dislike that black table, and an article with a cleanup template can not become featured until its prose is reworked :Priest; this article has a redundant quest section, and it doesn't have external links :Rogue, also no no external links section, and the title isn't bold :Shaman, *gasp* no pictures of totems?, also, the section headers were poorly done :Warlock, the section 'Macros' needs to go, and an external links section needs to be created :Warrior, too short :Human, nice :Dwarf, rather short :Night elf, nice :Gnome, the big quote is unprofessional, and the section names aren't logical :Draenei, section "Controversy, confusion, and retcons" has gotta go :Orc, no WoW screenshots :Undead, "Opinion and analysis" should be removed :Tauren, nice :Troll, nice :Blood elf, get rid of "Dark Destiny" and "Controversy" :I hope that helps. ' [[User:Apollozeus|''APΘLLΘ]](ZEUS)' 04:36, 9 April 2007 (EDT) ::I'll look at those and try to make them good enough to feature :::The info from dark destiny section of blood elves simply needs to be merged somewhere else in the article, not elimited entirely. It is a valid piece of information.Baggins 16:05, 31 May 2007 (UTC) Netherwing The article itself needs a bit of work, but I think it could be a good FA =) -- 22:22, 18 April 2007 (EDT) *'Oppose'. This article actually needs a lot of work. It doesn't have a bold title, it has capital letters where they shouldn't be, it doesn't have a picture but does cite one as a source (which by itself is already kinda weird) and lacks a lot of lore info. My three suggestions are: 1) wait until 2.1 comes out watch as more and more information on the Wing becomes available.. 2) improve the article and 3) please don't nominate articles for FA if they 'need a bit of work' (which is an understatement in this case). Featured articles should display WoWWiki's finest work, which this article really isn't (yet).' ''APΘLLΘ''(ZEUS)' 02:52, 19 April 2007 (EDT) *'Oppose''' Stressing what Apollo said: ...needs a lot of work. -- 03:02, 21 April 2007 (EDT) *'Comment' I've given Netherwing a big update, and merged in stuff from the nether drake article. It needs fleshing out, but should be a readale guide now. 22:51, 21 April 2007 (EDT) ** An update on this - the only problem is that too many red links makes this unusable atm. 13:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC) Deathwing Also known as Neltharion. I was bored; we were working on it; I was then like, cool, why not?-- 02:57, 19 April 2007 (EDT) *'Support'. Yeah, why not? ' [[User:Apollozeus|''APΘLLΘ]](ZEUS)' 09:05, 19 April 2007 (EDT) *'Support', its pretty complete now, has most info from Warcraft II, and later sources, even a bit of lost warcraft II adventures for good measure. So its pretty indepth coverage.Baggins 15:54, 31 May 2007 (UTC) *'Support''' Looks pretty complete and tidy to me! Pity we lack more relevant imagery, though. 13:38, 5 June 2007 (UTC) Lament of the Highborne Nice summary of an easter egg in a quest :) ' [[User:Apollozeus|''APΘLLΘ]](ZEUS)' 09:05, 19 April 2007 (EDT) *'Support'. I like the idea of this since it's 'different'. 22:01, 20 April 2007 (EDT) *'Support'. Yeah, who says featured articles have to be about people? Would be good to fill in the Red quest links though (and now that this note is here, maybe I'll remember to sometime later). -- 02:44, 21 April 2007 (EDT) *'Support''' But only after the red links are filled, as Fizz said. Tbh, not every FA should be a person...-- 03:01, 21 April 2007 (EDT) *'Support' Fill and nominate, tbh. Seems like a great idea. -- 03:48, 21 April 2007 (EDT) *'Oppose' A minor easter egg, hardly notable like previous FAs. Jeoh talk · 15:59, 29 May 2007 (UTC) **What makes you think that only big Warcraft stars like Illidan and Garona could get their own FA? I mean sure: the Lament of the Highborne is not as wellknown as their characters, but that is on itself not a reason to reject its nomination. ' [[User:Apollozeus|''APΘLLΘ]](ZEUS)' 19:37, 29 May 2007 (UTC) **A minor easter egg... yeah, uh, have you seen some of the random topics that wikipedia uses for FAs? An FA just means that the article is well presented, not that it is a notable part of Warcraft. -- 19:39, 29 May 2007 (UTC) *'Oppose''' Just because an article is popular doesn't mean it's Featured Article material. Featuring an article means that it is so impressive, thorough, and certainly important enough to be singled out as a major piece in a Wiki. While the Lament of the Highborne article is certainly nice, it's too obscure, unpolished, and irrelevant to the rest of Warcraft to be given a major spotlight such as this. At least not while there are other articles that relate to far more in the Warcraft Universe. Toasty McGrath 06:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC) **I'd like to draw your attention to the main page. I quote: Before being listed here, nominated articles are reviewed for accuracy, neutrality, completeness, and style on the talk page. End of quote. Nowhere it says that articles are checked for importance to the Warcraft universe. You are not giving a valid reason to oppose. ' [[User:Apollozeus|''APΘLLΘ]](ZEUS)' 07:47, 30 May 2007 (UTC) **Alright, then by that merit an equally valid article could possibly be Quest:Lazy_Peons if someone just added a picture of a sleeping orc worker. Where is the line drawn? Toasty McGrath 18:54, 30 May 2007 (UTC) **A few things. First off, you're jumping to conclusions there. Quest:Lazy Peons would ''NOT be complete with its current text and a picture. It will need a map with all the locations of the peons, an introtext, a video of someone completing it, a guide describing the quickest way to finish this quest and, of course, it could do with some external links. Also, I'd draw the line where WoWWiki is not able to come up with more info than Thottbot or Wowhead for a particular subject. ' [[User:Apollozeus|''APΘLLΘ]](ZEUS)' 15:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC) ** Fair enough, you've convinced me. I withdraw the opposition. Toasty McGrath 07:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC) *'Oppose', not the most indepth article. Although not much you can do to expand it. But still I don't think its up to the quality of some of more "complete" articles out there.Baggins 15:56, 31 May 2007 (UTC) *'Comment''' There's quite a bit of information that I've found out. Look at the talk page over there. I'm currently incorporating the information into it right now. *edit* There, how about now? Pzychotix 09:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC) Arthas Menethil *'Support' I was really impressed with this page, thought it was well written, good grammer, and nice pictures. 17:05, 20 April 2007 (EDT) *'Minor oppose'. Nice article, but the quote section is rather messy (has two different layouts). If someone has an idea to turn the section into something pretty (for inspiration, look at Illidan's article), I'll change this into support. Oh and by the way, new nominations go at the bottom. ' [[User:Apollozeus|''APΘLLΘ]](ZEUS)' 03:41, 21 April 2007 (EDT) Goblin You'd be nowhere without us! 03:12, 21 April 2007 (EDT) *'Oppose'. The article doesn't really seem complete to me. Furthermore, it's not referenced at all..I'm sure there's more info on this subject in WC-books.' ''APΘLLΘ''(ZEUS)' 03:41, 21 April 2007 (EDT) Karazhan I don't know, I guess I just grew rather fond of keeping an eye on the page after I totally redone it. (check version before my edit...) // [[User:Patrigan|'Patrigan']] | Talk/ \\ 17:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC) * '''Support'. Nice article indeed. ' [[User:Apollozeus|''APΘLLΘ]](ZEUS)' 17:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC) * '''Support' Very well-polished article, relevant to what many players are doing currently. I say feature it. -- 12:54, 31 May 2007 (UTC) * Oppose Dungeon layout section is messy, trash mobs appear both here and on subpages (choose one!), loot section needs polish, wrapping caused by the image at the very start is ugly. -- Starlightblunder 15:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC) *'Support' Informative, dispells and clarifies rumors well, and may actually be in-game soon. -- 14:56, 19 May 2007 (UTC) Scarlet Crusade Just an all-around thorough article with alot of detail, and even if relevence isn't exactly necessary for FA's, the Scarlet Crusade plays a major role in WoW. Plus it'll be a non-character FA, which has to give it a few bonus points. Toasty McGrath 06:27, 30 May 2007 (UTC) European forums Good enough ? *'Oppose'. "She's cute. What else can you say about her? Well, she's witty, atleast more often than not. She's also very often quite irritating. She might be some kind of a cross between a Gnome and a Troll." That quote should sum up what kind of horrible POV and non notable information is in that article. This article is definetely not good enough. Also, it wasn't necessary to mess with the layout of this page. ' [[User:Apollozeus|''APΘLLΘ]](ZEUS)' 13:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC) ::Yes, but isn't this the place of featured articles? :::Yeah, the nomination in the correct section now (I moved it), but for future reference please don't list new nominations on the bottom of the page and use level 3 headers ( ) as opposed to level 2 headers ( ). Otherwise, welcome to the wiki :) ' ''APΘLLΘ''(ZEUS)' 15:26, 4 June 2007 (UTC) Teron Gorefiend This article might need a little clean up, but this is a great character with lots of lore behind him. He is the focus of (imo) the best BC quests, and he is boss in the newly released Black Temple. *'Oppose'. The article has no references, doesn't clarify why Gorefiend ended up in service of Illidan, has a section which contains only one sentence and lastly it has images that say "(before patch 2.1)", but doesn't clarify what the post-patch 2.1 situation is.' ''APΘLLΘ''(ZEUS)' 17:13, 4 June 2007 (UTC) Previous nominations Garona Halforcen *'Support'. I just edited the page to work out some minor style issues, and I personally think this article is really complete now. ' ''APΘLLΘ''(ZEUS)' 02:17, 29 March 2007 (EDT) 'This article has now been featured' 14:53, 18 April 2007 (EDT) Illidan Stormrage *'Oppose', for now. I've tried to work out some weird stuff but the article is not there yet. First off, this article isn't very well referenced; I see multiple instances of . Furthermore, I'd like to know who styled him "Lord Illidan". ' ''APΘLLΘ''(ZEUS)' 02:17, 29 March 2007 (EDT) **Wow, this is perfect now. '''Support'. ' [[User:Apollozeus|''APΘLLΘ]](ZEUS)' 02:54, 19 April 2007 (EDT) *'Support', it's had a fair few changes since the above, and I've spent some time improving the article today. 14:53, 18 April 2007 (EDT) *'Support', This artile was the first to pop up in my mind even before i entered WW:FA 15:26, 18 April 2007 (EDT) *'Support', You are not prepared! <- Still gives me chills. Silly reason I know. I did read the article and it is interesting. 15:37, 18 April 2007 (EDT) *'Support', Kirkburn force me too 06:55, 20 April 2007 (EDT) *'Support', Seems well done and well outlined, very 'polished' page. 16:59, 20 April 2007 (EDT) 'This article has now been featured''' 11:06, 2 May 2007 (EDT)